Rationality in the Trinity

Seeing how the 'trinity' as a concept was introduced later and formalized by the Orthodox Church, can any of my co-religionist prove, without using their doctrine how the Trinity is logical. I will not use my doctrine (Qur'an) as this would make the discussion rhetorical so I'd like for those who you, who have mastered the philosophy of the trinity, prove logically that the Trinity is true. Think hard because I will critique it!

Remember you are our brothers and sisters under ONE GOD therefore this is not a critique on your religion but a friendly and healthy debate, and let any Muslim coming into this discussion respect that and not disrespect anyone here.

Edited by Israfil

Anglea, yes Mormons do believe that Elohim, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are three different gods.  However, it would appear that the Book of Mormon is modalistic in its view of the godhead - as opposed, for instance, to the doctrines taught in the King Follett discourse: men must learn to become gods themselves as did all the gods before them. So, it would be difficult for a Mormon to actually engage in an discussion on the Christian concept of a Tri-personal Deity, when Mormons are polytheistic.

Meng wrote:  However, it would appear that the Book of Mormon is modalistic in its view of the godhead - as opposed, for instance, to the doctrines taught in the King Follett discourse: men must learn to become gods themselves as did all the gods before them.

I have no idea who you are talking about here?  Is this someone from the Reformation era???

I suppose you could call us Polytheistic to a certain misunderstood degree.  Jesus is not a God, "yet".  But that gets into deeper Doctrinal issues than the trinity and would get this thread severely off topic.  However, saying we believe the Holy Spirit to be a God is false, he's part of the godhead but not a god.  He's more of the Islamic concept of an angel than a god.

Also, as a non trinitarian church, our views really can't be held to the theory of the trinity.

The trinity puts one person in three bodies.  Which is strange considering at Jesus's baptism, all three were present in separate form.  How can someone be in 3 physical places at once? 

in�car�na�tion (nk�r-nshn) n. The act of incarnating. The condition of being incarnated. Incarnation Christianity. The doctrine that the Son of God was conceived in the womb of Mary and that Jesus is true God and true man. A bodily manifestation of a supernatural being. One who is believed to personify a given abstract quality or idea. A period of time passed in a given bodily form or condition: hopes for a better life in another incarnation.

[Download Now or Buy the Book]

Source: The American Heritage� Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright � 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

incarnation

n 1: a new personification of a familiar idea; "the embodiment of hope"; "the incarnation of evil"; "the very avatar of cunning" [syn: embodiment, avatar] 2: (Christianity) the Christian doctrine of the union of God and man in the person of Jesus Christ [syn: Incarnation] 3: time passed in a particular bodily form; "he believes that his life will be better in his next incarnation" 4: the act of attributing human characteristics to abstract ideas etc. [syn: personification]

Source: WordNet � 2.0, � 2003 Princeton University

incarnation

that act of grace whereby Christ took our human nature into union with his
Divine Person, became man. Christ is both God and man. Human attributes and
actions are predicated of him, and he of whom they are predicated is God. A
Divine Person was united to a human nature (Acts 20:28; Rom. 8:32; 1 Cor. 2:8;
Heb. 2:11-14; 1 Tim. 3:16; Gal. 4:4, etc.). The union is hypostatical, i.e., is
personal; the two natures are not mixed or confounded, and it is perpetual.

Source: Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary

 

If you go by the definition of incarnation, God would have had to leave the Heavens to become Jesus.  Unless you believe him to be a separate God taken form?  That's the illogical aspect I see in the Trinitarian view.

Well Meng first off my position here is that of the late Averroes (Ibn Rushd) who had argued originally in his position against the belief in multiple gods. Although the Christian position is quite clear that the three essence are in unity with the one being it therefore cannot be rational if in principle that one being is solely one. Let us assume factually that the essence of "Son" and "Holy Spirit" are that of the One God. If we assume that they are the essence of God then we cannot say that they are truly the same person. Just as the son is the essence of the father but is not the father.

For example:

Zayd, Amir and Mofar are sons of Abdullah

Zayd having brown hair and brown skin

Amir having black hair and fair skin

and Mofar having  red and dark skin.

Although Zayd having brown hair a different color from Mofar he is still the brother of Mofar in principle because they share the same father. Although Amir has a different hair color than Zayd they are in essence brothers since having the same father. Although the father is the one who generated Zayd, Amir and Mofar they are individuals of themselves by principle. Only in essence are their relation to the father but they themselves are not the father.

In essence is the Father Son and Holy Spirit are related but in principle they are different. The difference made here are principle and essence. In essence the Son and Spirit are thus rom the Father since in this trinity the Father is at the top of the Triangle. However in principle they are different because the Son and Spirit have distinct identities even in language. So the question here is how are they the same logically? How are Amir, Zayd and Mofar all Abdullah logically? They are not but individuals themselves. Even taking my posiition further I will use Averroes' point of view:

This statement is in regards to the throne of God as mentioned in the Qur'an but this is quite relevant to the topic now since we are discussing the logic behind the trinity and the relation between Son, Father and Holy Spirit Averroes says thus:

"Two similar things cannot be related to the same place in the same way, for if the relationship is identical, the relata are identical. [The relata] cannot have an identical relation to the same locus, just as they cannot occupy the same locus (should they be of the same kind that occupies a locus), although the relationship of God to the throne is  the opposite of this type of relation; by which I mean that the throne subsist in him not that he subsist in the Throne.